So turn with me this morning to Exodus chapter 34, once again. Our study this morning resumes at verse 29. Just to very briefly set this up, you'll recall that the Lord, having reminded the Israelites of the great sin of idolatry, has just reinstated His covenant with them. The stipulations of that covenant, of course, appear in verses 17 through 28. If you were here with us last week, you'll recall that I didn't go over these in any great depth because they're virtually the same things that we looked at previously with relation to the first iteration of the covenant. And again, if you missed any of those previous messages, namely from Exodus chapter 12, Exodus chapter 24, I would encourage you to go to Sermon Audio and listen to any that you may have missed, and there you'll get a full treatment of what's involved in the covenant that God made with the Israelites, the same covenant that he has just reinstated with them. Anyway, this brings us to verse 29, where we read about something very strange that happened to Moses while he was up on the mountain speaking with and receiving instructions from God. Here we read, It came about when Moses was coming down from Mount Sinai, and the two tablets of the testimony were in Moses' hand as he was coming down from the mountain, that Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because of his speaking with him. So when Aaron and all the sons of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone, and they were afraid to come near him. Now what's going on here exactly? Did Moses' being in the presence of God's radiant glory give him some kind of sunburn? Some kind of deep dark tan. This is certainly plausible. It could have been that once he came down from the mountain it's as if he had been in the sun for a prolonged period of time. Remember the glory of Christ was enough to blind Saul on the road to Damascus. It was that bright. But I don't know that that's exactly the case here because that could easily be explained and that really wouldn't make the other Israelites afraid of him as we're told they were in this passage. I believe that what happened here was the result of some supernatural thing occurring as opposed to having a natural explanation. One of the clues that we have here is that Moses himself was unaware that his face was actually shining, sunburn of the magnitude that would be hinted at here would certainly be something that Moses would have been aware of. Second-degree burns on your face, as you saw in me the last few weeks, having gone to a football game with no head protection and no sunscreen, it can make a noticeable difference and it can be a painful difference. Moses would have been aware of that. We're told here that he wasn't aware of that. The way Moses' condition is described here, his face radiated because he had been in the presence of God for some 40 days, and it was so profound that when Aaron and the other Israelites saw him, they didn't want to go near him. It's almost as if he was glowing in some sort of I don't know, nuclear waste sort of way. I mean there was something about him that made them reluctant to go any closer to him than they would have. So what did Moses do to alleviate or calm their fears? Well he he immediately covered his face, at some point he covered his face, but what did he do initially? Verse 31, then Moses called to them, and Aaron and all the rulers in the congregation returned to him, and Moses spoke to them. Afterward all the sons of Israel came near, and he commanded them to do everything that the Lord had spoken to him on Mount Sinai. When Moses had finished speaking, then he put a veil over his face. Now, Let me just ask you a question. If they were afraid, if there was something so unusual about his appearance that they felt reluctant to come near him, why didn't he put the veil over his face before he began speaking to them? That's a good question. Scholars are divided on why that might be. I tend to agree with most of the consensus, which is that Moses's change in appearance was a way of validating his message. Moses wanted them to see. You know, I'm not the same man who went up 40 days ago onto the mountain and received this reinstatement or reiteration of God's covenant. This has changed me. This has changed me substantively. What better way to validate your own message than to show actual physical proof that you had been where you said you had been. Now at the same time as his message is being validated, I think this would have also enhanced his leadership role. This would have solidified him in the minds of even the most skeptical that he was in fact an intercessor or a go-between between them and God himself. So why did Moses again wait until he finished speaking before putting the veil over his face? I believe that this is a reference to something that we'll read later in Numbers 12-3. You can write that down. Where God inspired him to write, the man Moses was very humble more than any man who was on the face of the earth. You might just assume that he would speak to them with unveiled face and he'd just walk around all the time with no veil on his face. Well, according again to Numbers 12-3, he was humble, which means that he probably didn't like all of the hubbub. He didn't like all the recognition. After all, think about it this way, humility actually points away from ourselves and onto, ideally, onto God himself. Moses didn't want all the attention being paid to him. He wanted them to understand the God that he served. And so, again, being a humble man, Moses veiled his face because, again, he didn't want all the attention drawn to his unusual appearance. Now, how would you react? Think about the average man. I'm kind of embarrassed to say I might just let that face shine for a little bit, right? Look at me. I mean, you know, people often use sunburn, I guess, as a virtue signal. Where have you been? I've been on the beach for the last week, you know, or I've been doing this or I've been doing that. Any other man might have done that, but again, not Moses. As F.B. Meyer noted, as people become conscious of their superiority to others and boast of it, it's certain that they have never really seen the beauty of God's holiness and have no clear knowledge of the condition of their own hearts. I think Moses used this as a humbling experience, right? Maybe he was embarrassed by it. You know, maybe he was taken down a notch or two. by the fact that he had undergone this change, whatever that looked like. Again, we don't really know exactly what's going on, but I do think it's more than just a sunburn or a type of tan. I also believe that Moses veiled his face out of simple love for his brethren. It bothered them. Moses was not a button pusher. This is a real problem, even, I think, in the local church sometimes. We find things that bother people, and if we're particularly in a grumpy mood or we're particularly persnickety about that person, there are times when we can use those as buttons to push. Let's just look in your own marriage. Any couples here, married couples, willing to admit that you have buttons in your relationship? Okay. Put your hand up if you have buttons in your relationship. You know what I'm talking about. Now keep your hand up if you push those buttons from time to time. Right? We're button pushers. Sometimes when we find people overtaken with certain weaknesses, instead of behaving like Paul says in places like 1 Corinthians 8, where we're to not eat the meat sacrificed to idols because we love the weaker brother, sometimes we insist that our weaker brother just needs to grow up, and we push those buttons. Moses wasn't a button pusher. Moses loved the brethren, and this, I believe, is one of the reasons he covered his face. In fact, look at verse 34. But whenever Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he would take off the veil until he came out. And whenever he came out and spoke to the sons of Israel, what he had been commanded, the sons of Israel would see the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone. So Moses would replace the veil over his face until he went in to speak with him. So he would go in, speak to God with unveiled face, he would come back out and put the veil over his face because he knew it bothered some of the brethren. I think we would do well to learn a very simple practical lesson from this. Whatever way you can bless your brothers and sisters, and a lot of times that's not by doing things, that's also by not doing certain things, The more that you can bless your brothers and sisters, the better off everyone will be. Now again, there is a need for some people to grow up in certain areas, but that's the beauty of it. Instead of pushing their buttons, how about pulling them to the side and saying, can we talk about this? I've noticed you have a certain weakness in this area. Can we talk this through? Can I alleviate you of that burden of fear that you have for this particular thing? It's all about, again, dialogue within the body. Can we talk about this thing instead of me thinking bad of you because you're so weak, me pushing your buttons because you're so weak? Can we not just reason this out together? Can we just talk about this? And the same advice is true in your families, by the way. Instead of being button pushers, just talk to each other instead of being cruel like we often are. Well, how long did this condition last? I mean, did Moses die with a radiating face? No. No. How do we know? Well, because Paul talks about this very thing over in 2 Corinthians 3. Go ahead and turn there, 2 Corinthians 3. Here in 2 Corinthians 3, case you haven't read it in a while, Paul pronounces a scathing indictment against the efficacy of the Old Covenant, or as he refers to it, the ministry of death. You ever heard the Old Covenant referred to in that way? Paul says the Old Covenant basically is just a ministry of death when compared to the new and better covenant in Christ's blood. Note carefully what he says beginning at verse 7. He says, but if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. For indeed, what had glory in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it. For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory." You know, a lot of people like to go to Galatians, and we'll look at a couple of passages in Galatians in just a minute. A lot of people like to go to Galatians to cite Paul when he speaks about the inefficacy of the old covenant, about how the letter of the law was never able to save anyone, about how the law itself was our tutor to lead us to Christ, and so on and so forth. I think if you're going to have a proof text for the supersession of the new covenant over the old covenant, this is it. This is it. The Old Covenant, the ministry of death, has been completely surpassed by the New Covenant. Paul's making the point that as seemingly glorious as the Old Covenant may have appeared, it was completely devoid of glory when compared with the New. Remember what I've said all along about the purpose of the Old Covenant and the effectiveness of the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant was put in place as a means of instilling in man a sense of futility, a sense of desperation, a sense of inadequacy. The Old Covenant served one purpose and one purpose only, primarily, and that purpose was to say loudly and clearly to all men, you can't do this. And what comes with that but a sense of Utility, a sense of frustration. Try as he might, man can never be perfected by attempting to keep every jot and tittle of God's law, because God's standard was and is perfect obedience. Perfect obedience. This is why Paul could say confidently in Galatians 3, 23 through 29. You can go ahead and turn there, Galatians 3. Galatians 3, beginning at verse 23. Before faith came, now wait a minute, stop there. Abraham had faith. Abraham's faith was reckoned to him as righteousness. Abraham predates Moses and the giving of the law. So are we to believe that no one had faith in the old covenant? No, that's not what Paul's saying. What he's saying is before faith came in its full fruition, before Christ came and ratified the new covenant in his blood, before the Holy Spirit was sent to permanently indwell us and to teach us and guide us and compel us and convict us, before this new covenant was ratified and sealed the blood of Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, that's what he means when he says before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith, which was later to be revealed. By and large, he's talking here about Jews, by and large the Jews have in fact been shut out Remember what we read over in Romans 11, God has given them a temporary stupor. God has blinded their eyes so that they can't see the truth. They're shut up from this faith that has been revealed to the saints of God. Back during Paul's day, it was an unusual thing for a Jewish person to come to faith in Jesus Christ, at least when compared to the ministry that was ongoing among the Gentiles, right? Therefore, the law, he says, has become our tutor to lead us to Christ so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we're no longer under a tutor. We've graduated. We were under a tutor every day by virtue of the law and its demands placed on us. Once faith came to us by God's gift of grace, we graduated. We no longer need a tutor, for you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who are baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek. There's neither slave nor free man. There's neither male nor female, for you're all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you're Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise. There's the connection. Because you are children of the promise, you share the like precious faith that was given to Abraham, which was reckoned to him as righteousness. And oh, by the way, let me just read that again, the last part. There's neither Jew nor Greek. There's neither slave nor free man. There's neither male nor female. This seems to be one of those truths that so easily escapes the masses in the church at large today. Why, oh why, oh why, oh why are we continuing in the church at large in big evangelicalism? Why is there such an intense emphasis on the Jews? I don't say that as an anti-Semite. I love the Jewish people just like I love Gentile people. I love the Jewish people like I love Native Americans, like I love people of all colors, all ethnicities, all types of people. Why? Because God has effectively broken down all those superficial distinctions. God has made us all one in Christ. You're either in Christ, at which point you're no longer a Jew, or you're not. Am I oversimplifying that? You're either a child of Abraham according to the promise, which gives you all the benefits in the universe. Ephesians 1, we've been blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ. But if you're outside of that, if you're relying on your relation to Abraham in the flesh, there's no correlation there between you and the Christian. You're just a lost person, beholden to a false religion, beholden to a Christless religion, Judaism, You are, for all intents and purposes, if you're in that camp, an enemy of God. We're going to talk about that in the next hour in more depth, but this is not rocket science. It's really not. Now, as a Latter-day Glorious, which I am, I do believe that Romans 11 speaks of a remnant from among those natural branches that was pulled off, those with a Jewish pedigree, those with Jewish lineage going all the way back, perhaps to Abraham, although nobody knows. When the temple was destroyed, along with the library in Alexandria, all the genealogical records are gone, and they've been gone for centuries. There's no way to connect the dots anymore, but God knows who they are, and at this time period, the fullness of the Gentiles, when that happens, I do believe there's going to be a great remnant of those people formerly beholden to Judaism who will come to Christ. But here's the beauty of it all. What will they be at that point? Will they still be Jews? No. They'll be like you and me. They'll be in Christ. They'll be Christians. And the moment that happens to them, whether that happens between now and then, or whether that happens with this great ingathering of the remnant among those natural people, guess what will also be true? Even then, there is neither Jew nor Greek. Why? Because if we belong to Christ, then we're all Abraham's descendants, heirs according to the promise, right? Again, we have to really wrap our brains around that truth. Now again, dispensationalism has done great harm to the truth in this regard, because the dispensationalist sees the Jewish people as separate and distinct. God has this people called the Jews, and even, like I've said before, John Hagee says they don't even need the gospel, because they're Jews. They're God's people. Well, wait a minute. Who does Paul say God's people are? Abraham's children, according to the promise. Not the seed, not the descendancy, the promise. The promise of what? That God would redeem his people from every tribe, tongue, and nation as he has deemed fit. So in that way, the law is rendered moot, at least the ceremonial and civil law of the Jews. We're not talking about the moral law. The moral law exists in perpetuity. How do we know? Because both Jesus and all of the writers of the New Testament told us that it's still intact. The moral law of God will exist in perpetuity. Why? Because it's that law that's been written on our hearts. It's that law that governs our behavior. It's that law that the Holy Spirit reminds us of and keeps us in this world as a preserving force, a limiting force, as I've said, of Satan's power. We are the restrainer as the Holy Spirit indwells us and helps us to work in that way. But that's another sermon for another day. Paul's point here is also captured by the writers for the Hebrews, again, which I believe is Paul. Hebrews 10, 1 through 4, we've read this multiple times over the last several months. But again, I think the writer here could not be clearer in terms of the place that the ceremonial and civil law, all of these 613 laws that were passed down from generation to generation among the Jews, that law served a purpose for a time but that purpose is no longer valid. How do we know? Hebrews 10, for the law, that's the law he's talking about, not the moral law, but the rest of the law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, that law can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered? Because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins. But in those sacrifices, there's a reminder of sins year by year, for it's impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." Again, we have this whole a sacrificial system that was deeply rooted in the Mosaic Law, even predating the Mosaic Law. We have this sacrificial system that people believed was efficient to remove sins, but it was only a picture. It was only a foreshadowing of what? Every sacrifice that was made on that altar on the Day of Atonement, in the Holy of Holies, the blood was sprinkled on everything in there. Those sacrifices were intended to point to the ultimate sacrifice to be made in Christ. Now think about this very carefully. The writer of the Hebrews is exactly spot on here. If those sacrifices offered year after year were actually able to do what they portended to be able to do, then there would not be a need for any more sacrificial system. I mean, you get everybody sacrificed for, if it worked, then there would be no need for any more sacrificial system. This is what boggles the mind so much. There are professing believers this morning in churches all over this land who would tell you to your face, we believe that the temple is going to be rebuilt and the sacrificial system will be reinstated. Huh? Why? Was Christ's sacrifice not enough? Did it not work? Do we need to bring back sacrificing animals for what? Oh, it's going to be just for a memorial. Is Christ not a memorial enough? When we partake of the Lord's table, are we not doing that very thing? Remembering the broken body to shed blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who died so that we wouldn't be beholden to those systems ever again? And yet you want to bring that back, even as a memorial? See, the Roman Catholics are in hot water here as well. Because every week they re-sacrifice Christ in the Mass. Why? Was Christ's one sacrifice not sufficient? It was. but it's only efficient in those who are children of Abraham according to the promise. All these gyrations and genuflections and spiritual gymnastics that people go through week after week after week really are just a way of proclaiming what Christ did didn't work. I have to do that. I have to add to that. I have to make it more efficacious. I have to keep it intact. You see how insidious works-based salvation systems are. They really, I'm not just poking people in the eye here. I'm not just, you know, I love our brethren who differ from us in these areas, but I just want them to come to a full orb knowledge of the truth. That's all. Is there any harm in that? I mean, if I think that you're wrong in a certain area, I'm duty-bound to say, thus saith the Lord. And what the Lord says is fairly convincing to me. Go back to 2 Corinthians 3. Here's another part of this condemnation of that old covenant mindset among the people of God. Paul writes in verse 12, therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech. There you go. Right? Be bold with the truth. Having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech and are not like Moses. who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. But their minds were hardened. For until this very day, at the reading of the old covenant, the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ." You get that? So many worshipers today worship with a veiled face. So many who would otherwise evangelize with great fervor and great excitement for what the Lord has done, they evangelize with a veiled face. So many people who are afraid of offending someone with the truth are speaking with a veiled face. Paul says don't do that. The veil's been removed. We speak Christ crucified. We preach Him unashamedly. Romans 1 16, I'm not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Why? For it's the power of God unto salvation to those who believe to the Jew first and then to the Greek. He goes on, but to this day, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their hearts. But, whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image, from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit. Because of the finished work of Christ on our behalf, we've been set free from the requirements of God's ceremonial and civil law, having had his moral law written on our hearts. And it's going to remain there forever as a testimony to his great love for us. don't miss what Paul writes here at the end of the passage. Moses's changed appearance was simply a type or a foreshadowing of the change that's now taking place in all of God's children as we're progressively sanctified more and more into his image. Now think about that for just a minute. This says that If you are a child of God by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, there will be enough change in you to catch people's attention. There will be enough different and distinct about you as one of God's children. It will be as if you have seen the Lord yourself because, again, the last part of that passage, we will be mirrors of God's own glory. Are you a mirror of God's glory? Think about your average day this past week. Think about all the difficult circumstances you found yourself in, all the things that were going on at work, all the things that were going on in the home. Parents, especially parents of young, impressionable children, are you a mirror reflection of the glory of God? Or do your children look at you and wonder why we even bother to go to that place every week when you act the way you do? It's been well asked. If you were put on trial for being a believer, would there be enough evidence to convict you? Good question. And yet the reality is here. If Moses was so changed that people were afraid to go near him, I would say that as a foreshadowing or a type of the faith that we all are given in Christ, I'm not saying people should be afraid to come up to us and talk to us, that should never be, but they should be a little intimidated in a glorious way. Are people so impressed by your godliness that they see you as a formidable foe? in the arena of ideas? Do they try their wokeness out on you, knowing or thinking that they can probably convince you to come to their side, or are they afraid? I'll never forget being in the military for as long as I was, and being a boss, and every time I'd walk into a room, people are talking about all kinds of things that they knew I would not abide. And I'm not using this as a virtue signal, I was no better than anybody else, but I did strive to be a mirror of God's glory in my job. I tried to do everything as unto the Lord in my job. And when I would walk into a room, people would mysteriously just... Sometimes I'd push buttons. What are y'all talking about? Oh, nothing. Why? Because they knew that I wouldn't abide that. And it wasn't even worth their time to try to win me over to their side. I will say this, I was very respected and very loved by the people that worked for me as well. And you should be if you're a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. But there's something to be said about the picture or the foreshadowing that Moses exhibits here. You have to ask yourself, is there enough change in your life to where people are sufficiently impressed by your faith? Is there? You know, I have to admit that I'm really sad and kind of bewildered as well by those professing Christians who refer to themselves as Messianic Jews. You ever meet anybody like that? Anybody know anybody like that? They go to like Beth Simca or I've got friends over there. I mean, still bewildered by them. You can still have friends who are weird, right? Some of you are my friends and I'm weird, so. But in case you're not familiar with who they are, these are professing believers who, for whatever reason, feel like it's necessary for Christians to continue practicing certain aspects of Judaism. You go to one of their services and they begin every service by, they'll take the Torah out of its case and they'll parade it down the aisle. And people, you know, Christians, professing Christians, you know, will walk up and kiss their hand and touch the Torah. And a lot of the men wear the yarmulke and they wear the keffiyeh and they wear the, you know, the prayer shawls and things like this. I haven't seen any phylacteries, right? But it really is a weird scenario to be in. A lot of them practice the old dietary laws. A lot of them practice a lot of things that are distinctly Jewish. And why do they do that? They do that because, again, they're confused by this idea that Judaism draws someone closer to God because the Jews are God's people. And again, you see the disconnect there. There's something meritorious, salvific even, in doing all those things bound up in Judaism. So why do they behave this way? Well, again, because they believe that the Jews are God's people, but they have a hard time understanding the distinctiveness between the Old Covenant and the New. They don't like the idea that we have to break with the old in order to adopt the new. They insist that that presents a discontinuity between the old and new testaments, right? They insist that to do so is to throw the baby out with the bathwater and to dispense with the old covenant is to deny the ongoing efficacy and perpetuity of God's moral law. That's not at all the case. I've said before, what we believe in is not supersessionism. We don't believe that the church supersedes Israel. We don't believe that the church replaces Israel in God's plan of redemption. We believe that Israel was always the church. True Israel, right? True Israel has always been the ekklesia, the called out and gathered together people of God. Those who identify with Abraham based upon the promise that was made to him and not the flesh. Right? Do we need to go back over this? I think we do. Now they don't believe what we read from Galatians 3 about there no longer being a distinction between Jew and Gentile. They don't believe that Abraham's true descendants are those who belong to Christ, heirs according to the promise. And why that is, why they can deny such simple text, I don't know. But it's not an isolated teaching. Look again at Romans 9. Romans 9. Actually, before you do that, look at Galatians 4. And if you're already at Romans 9, keep your finger there. Galatians 4. Let's start at verse 1. Galatians 4 verse 1, Paul says, now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave, although he is owner of everything. But he's under guardians and managers until the date set by the father. So also we, while we were children, were held in bondage under the elemental things of the world. He's talking about the law again, all of the ceremonial and civil law traditions. But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order that he might redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son. And if a son, then an heir through God." However, at that time, when you did not know God. You were slaves to those which by nature are no gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things to which you desire to be enslaved all over again? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I fear for you that perhaps I have labored over you in vain. Paul's like, look, we've gone over this, folks. The New Covenant has superseded the Old Covenant. What was not possible in the Old Covenant has been made possible in the New Covenant, ratified by the blood of Christ. If you belong to Christ, you're Abraham's children indeed. There's no need to go back to this laborious, old system of elemental things. Do this and don't do that. Your salvation depends on it. Our salvation depends on one thing. On Christ. That's it. Anything else is just unnecessary. And I would add this, anything else is an affront to Christ himself. Romans nine, verse six. For they are not all Israel who were descended from Israel. Full stop, just stop there. That speaks volumes. That should seal the deal. John Hagee, go away. Seriously. Stop it with your nonsensical approach to understanding this distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Paul says it right here, they're not all Israel who are descended from Israel. Nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants. See how he doubles down? He says the same thing, but in a different way, and he's doubling down. He says, but through Isaac your descendants will be named. That is, it's not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. Or how about what he wrote two chapters earlier in Romans 4? Go ahead and turn there, Romans 4. Speaking about the necessity of God-given faith as a means of being in a right relationship to God. as opposed to simply being circumcised. Remember, that was the whole argument. If you're a male and you are physically descended from Abraham, all you need to do is be circumcised and you're a child of the covenant. Which, by the way, is the same mistake made by our Presbyterian friends who insist that being baptized is the sign and seal of the new covenant. It's not. The circumcision of the heart is the sign and seal of the new covenant, not physical circumcision, not physical baptism. Right? Romans 4, beginning of verse 4. Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness, apart from works. There's the whole sinking of the ceremonial and civil law. It's not based on works, period. David says, blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven and whose sins have been covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account. Is this blessing then on the circumcised or on the uncircumcised also? For we say faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it credited? While he was circumcised or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith, which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had while uncircumcised." You realize this is a proof text for credo baptism. Abraham wasn't circumcised until it was proven that he had God-given faith. So if you're going to make that correlation between circumcision and baptism, at least do it the correct way and insist that the child, before they are rantized, it's not even baptized, it's rantized, sprinkled, before they're rantized, make sure that they have the faith that's necessary for them to do that. Abraham wasn't circumcised on the basis of that imparting faith to him. He had faith before he was circumcised, right? For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be the heir of the world was not through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified. So much for covenant children. That's a law, by the way. They're using the law to justify calling unbelievers believers. They're covenant children. Well, the law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there is no violation. For this reason, it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all. were all Abraham's children, according to the promise. Not because of anything he was, not because of anything he did, not because of anything he underwent. Now can you imagine, I've said this before, but can you imagine Paul coming to all these realizations and teaching these things to Timothy? The same Timothy that he took to be circumcised? Timothy probably was like, really Paul? Anyway, remember as well what Paul wrote two chapters earlier in Romans 225. This is again another nail in the coffin of this works-based Judeo-centric mindset that so many seem enamored with. Romans 2.25. Circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law. But if you're a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. Now again, put baptism in there. If you're a paedo-baptist, it's the same thing if you insist that the signs are interchangeable. Baptism is indeed profitable Young little baby? If you keep the law? Is that baby a keeper of the law? No, that baby is born a breaker of the law. Romans 5, 12. We're all born in sin. We all need a Redeemer. That Redeemer is Christ. Does he save babies unknown to us? Yeah, absolutely. As I've said before, I believe that every aborted baby, I believe every baby that dies in infancy, I believe it's automatic heaven. I believe that's just God's way of saying, nope, that one's mine. Now, call me naive. If I get to heaven and find out, no, I did have non-elect babies. OK. Right? But the whole idea that anyone can be justified before God on the basis of the old covenant, it's just false. So why do people keep running back to it? As if there's something there. Why do certain people tout the excellencies of the Jewish people? Because they're God's people. They're not God's people until they're God's people. And here's the mystery. When they become God's people, guess what they no longer are? Jews! So to say that one is a Jew is actually one of the strongest pejoratives imaginable. To insist that you're a Jew is to hold up a sign, I'm an enemy of God. I'm a Christ denier. I'm not gonna say Christ killer, that's anti-semitic and that's rooted in this whole idea that they put Christ to death. You know who put Christ to death, right? You and me. Ultimately, you know who put Christ to death? Him. It pleased him to crush him. But all that aside, If you're going to hold the Jewish people in any special regard, you have to ask yourself, why? Because once they come to faith in Christ, which we all pray for, or you should be, once they come to Christ, I can tell you what they no longer are. They're no longer Jewish. The old covenant had a twofold purpose, really. Number one, to pronounce a death sentence on those who thought themselves able to keep it. That's one of the twofold purpose of the old covenant. And two, to magnify Christ and his perfect obedience to the law. Well, this brings us to chapter 35. And we're not going to do this today. Moses turns his attention now to once again reminding the Israelites about the importance and the sanctity of the Sabbath. And the Sabbath day itself, as we've talked before and we're going to talk about again next week, the Sabbath day itself was a shadow, a type. The Sabbath day itself was a prefiguring of this day called the Lord's Day. And we'll talk about what that means in our next time together, Lord willing.